joshbensadon via groups.io wrote:
You've had a lot of experience on assembler, I wonder what you think about how flexible assemblers should be? To be exact, let's talk about
the Z80 here.? Forgive me if I can't remember this straight off the top
of my head, but there are some instructions that look funny.
One problem is human nature; everyone has their own idea of what an assembler "should" do.
Another is that manufacturers copyright their assembler mnemonics. That forces subsequent designers to invent their own. I think that's what required Zilog to come up with their own set for the Z80 instead of using/extending the Intel 8080 set.
So, we wind up with every micro having a unique set of mnemonics. And half a dozens different assemblers for each CPU!
Which is "better"? Whichever one you have, or like, or happen to use the most! Aren't standards great? We have so many to choose from!
If the CPU runs an OS (8080/8085/Z80, 6502, 1802, PDP-8, PDP11, VAX)
I usually have a ASM native to that on the platform as well as cross assemblers.
I did the same years ago with teco compatible visual editor (Vteco, Vedit,
KED, EDT, TPU, LSE and friends) so a file could go from platform to platform and still look and edit in a similar way on a VT100 or VT220/320
terminal or PC. I prefer to spend time of the code not dealing with new
editors.
Editors are another can-o-worms! Early ones that came with the OS were often terrible. Like you, I discovered VEDIT early on, and standardized on it. One nice feature is its macro language was powerful enough to automatically translate one set of mnemonics into another. I.e. it could convert 8080 assembler to Z80. It was a way to deal with the endlessly changing syntax of various assemblers.
Lee
--
A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is
nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
-- Antoine de Saint Exupery
--
Lee Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, www.sunrise-ev.com
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
Lee Hart